Lazy engineering gets to market first, and if most users don't find it harmful, the company wins?

Yes, spying on users is a cheap way to get results.

The fact that incentives exist to violate user privacy is not an excuse to violate user privacy.

Giant piles of cash can buy many excuses. ;)

Lazy, half-assed, corner-cutting everything gets to market first. This is a problem. It's also why markets accrue regulations over time.

I agree, and it's likely that's the most correct answer if people want to see the market change.

The second most correct answer is to just opt-out if you feel spied on and get to feel very smug watching people who didn't opt-out get burned by their choices. Honestly, I recommend that solution unless one encounters a situation where opt-out is impossible.

We seem to have no good solution to this. Capitalism/cowboy development: ship crap fast, break stuff, accrue regulations. Socialism/planned economy: have meetings to plan meetings to discuss requirements forever and nothing ever happens.

While both were government funded, the "cowboy" approach of ArpaNet and IP vs the OSI network protocol consortia are a great case study.